<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1989 (5) TMI 203 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74918</link>
    <description>The Tribunal determined that the appeal filed before it was maintainable as it concluded that the impugned order was passed by the Deputy Collector of Customs, and not by the assumed Additional Collector of Customs. Despite initial disagreements among members, the majority view prevailed, leading to the appeal being deemed maintainable before the Tribunal for regular hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 May 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2011 13:22:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113197" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (5) TMI 203 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74918</link>
      <description>The Tribunal determined that the appeal filed before it was maintainable as it concluded that the impugned order was passed by the Deputy Collector of Customs, and not by the assumed Additional Collector of Customs. Despite initial disagreements among members, the majority view prevailed, leading to the appeal being deemed maintainable before the Tribunal for regular hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 May 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>